City Attorney: Misbehaving cops’ names should be released

Published 12:15 pm, Tuesday, June 21, 2011

The Seattle City Attorney’s Office has asked a judge to clear the way for the city to release the names of police officers disciplined for misconduct.

Asking that a King County Superior Court judge overturn a May decision, City Attorney Pete Holmes' office claimed an arbitrator erred in ruling last month in finding that the police union's contract requires the city to keep the names of offending officers secret.

In a request for review filed Tuesday, Assistant City Attorney Paul A. Olsen claimed the arbitrator misinterpreted the city’s contract with the Seattle Police Officers Guild and ignored state open records law in finding that the city must censor the names of Seattle officers from documents released publicly.

Some Oregon Residents Upset at Prospect of Pumping Their Own GasBuzz 60

Doug Baldwin playcallingBy Michael-Shawn Dugar, SeattlePI

Van Crashes Into Pedestrians Injuring SixAssociated Press

US military to accept transgender recruits after Trump drops appealEuronews

Snow on Christmas Eve, 2017Seattle Post-Intelligencer

Ice carving at WinterfestSeattle Post-Intelligencer

Amtrak derails near OlympiaGrant Hindsley / SeattlePI

Golden retriever meets Darth Vader and EwokSeattle Post-Intelligencer

Seattle's tunnel project, 2017 in reviewWSDOT

Hillary Clinton Book Signing Capitol HillSeattle Post-Intelligencer

“The arbitration decision in this case violates the clear mandate of statutory public policy because it requires the Seattle Police Department to withhold information that the (state Public Records Act) requires it to disclose,” Olsen told the court.

“The arbitrator rejected the City’s interpretation in favor of an absurd result: requiring the City to assert a public records exemption that the City knows is unsupportable by law,” he continued. “Forcing the City to knowingly violate the (Public Records Act) is contrary to public policy and must be rejected by the Court.”

The Police Guild welcomed the arbitrator’s decision, and faulted the city for fighting it.

Following the decision, Guild President Rich O'Neill said the city was attempting to back out of commitments made during contentious negotiations.

"I am pleased with the arbitrator's decision but also bewildered by the actions of the city," O'Neill said in a statement in May. "I simply do not understand why they sign a contract with us in July and in less than a year they begin violating that very agreement. This issue, like so many that we currently have scheduled for formal arbitration hearings could be settled by simply sitting down with us and negotiating."

The City Attorney’s Office request is scheduled for hearing on June 29 before Superior Court Judge Laura Inveen. The city has asked the judge to reject the arbitrator’s finding and allow it to release the names of officers disciplined for misconduct.